Partition function of modified Ising model

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around the partition function of a modified Ising model represented by a specific Hamiltonian. The model separates particles into categories based on their spin orientations and proximity, leading to a new Hamiltonian formulation. Constraints are established to relate the number of up and down spin particles to pairs of particles with various spin configurations. The challenge lies in evaluating the partition function, Z, as a function of the constrained variables, particularly due to the inability to factor the sum of exponentials. The participant expresses difficulty in finding a solution to compute Z under these constraints.
LCSphysicist
Messages
644
Reaction score
162
Homework Statement
.
Relevant Equations
.
$$H = - J ( \sum_{i = odd}) \sigma_i \sigma_{i+1} - \mu H ( \sum_{i} \sigma_i ) $$
So basically, my idea was to separate the particles in this way::
##N_{\uparrow}## is the number of up spin particles

##N_{\downarrow}## "" down spin particles

##N_1## is the number of pairs of particles close to each other with spin up

##N_2## "" with spin down

##N_3## "" with spin antiparallel
Therefore
$$\hat{H} = - J (N_1 + N_2 - N_3 ) - \mu H (N_{\uparrow} - N_{\downarrow})$$
Subject to the following constraints:
$$\frac{N}{2} = N_1 + N_2 + N_3$$

$$N_{\uparrow} = 2N_1 + N_3$$

$$N_{\downarrow} = 2N_2 + N_3$$

$$N = N_{\uparrow} + N_{\downarrow}$$
But, even make this clarifications, i can't see how to find the partition! If we substitute the above expressions on ##\sum e^{-\hat{H}/kT}##, we will find Z as a function of, for example, ##Z=Z(N_{\uparrow},N_3)##. But i don't know how to evaluate such a sum! I mean, it can't factoriz in the sum of two expoents, because both arguments are constrained! (We can't have ##N_3 = N/2, N_{\uparrow} = 0##, for example)
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Done!
 
Thread 'Help with Time-Independent Perturbation Theory "Good" States Proof'
(Disclaimer: this is not a HW question. I am self-studying, and this felt like the type of question I've seen in this forum. If there is somewhere better for me to share this doubt, please let me know and I'll transfer it right away.) I am currently reviewing Chapter 7 of Introduction to QM by Griffiths. I have been stuck for an hour or so trying to understand the last paragraph of this proof (pls check the attached file). It claims that we can express Ψ_{γ}(0) as a linear combination of...
Thread 'Stacked blocks & pulley system'
I've posted my attempt at a solution but I haven't gone through the whole process of putting together equations 1 -4 yet as I wanted to clarify if I'm on the right path My doubt lies in the formulation of equation 4 - the force equation for the stacked block. Since we don't know the acceleration of the masses and we don't know if mass M is heavy enough to cause m2 to slide, do we leave F_{12x} undetermined and not equate this to \mu_{s} F_{N} ? Are all the equations considering all...

Similar threads

Back
Top